1997Terrorism and Political ViolenceRequires access

Self‐determination in the UN era: A response to Peter Sproat

Ravi Mahalingam

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

This article argues that self‐determination in the UN era is a multi‐faceted concept that seeks to promote civic nationalism within states while preserving territorial integrity and sovereignty rights. To this end, the UN has expounded an internal and external conception of self‐determination. The internal view is broad and imposes obligations upon states and confers rights on peoples or nations to seek representative governments. The external view of self‐determination refers to a purported right of secession and is narrowly construed in favor of states’ rights. In current international law, no right of secession exists for any nation or people. Therefore, to accuse the UN of encouraging or appeasing ethnic cleansing and favoring a right of secession in international law, as Sproat contends, misinterprets both the UN's view of self‐determination and international practice.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article argues that self‐determination in the UN era is a multi‐faceted concept that seeks to promote civic nationalism within states while preserving territorial integrity and sovereignty rights. To this end, the UN has expounded an internal and external conception of self‐determination. The internal view is broad and imposes obligations upon states and confers rights on peoples or nations to seek representative governments. The external view of self‐determination refers to a purported right of secession and is narrowly construed in favor of states’ rights. In current international law, no right of secession exists for any nation or people. Therefore, to accuse the UN of encouraging or appeasing ethnic cleansing and favoring a right of secession in international law, as Sproat contends, misinterprets both the UN's view of self‐determination and international practice.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This article argues that self‐determination in the UN era is a multi‐faceted concept that seeks to promote civic nationalism within states while preserving territorial integrity and sovereignty rights. To this end, the UN has expounded an internal and external conception of self‐determination. The internal view is broad and imposes obligations upon states and confers rights on peoples or nations to seek representative governments. The external view of self‐determination refers to a purported right of secession and is narrowly construed in favor of states’ rights. In current international law, no right of secession exists for any nation or people. Therefore, to accuse the UN of encouraging or appeasing ethnic cleansing and favoring a right of secession in international law, as Sproat contends, misinterprets both the UN's view of self‐determination and international practice.

Key concepts: Secession, Self-determination, Sovereignty, Territorial integrity, Nationalism, Political science, Law, International law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Self‐determination in the UN era: A response to Peter Sproat — Research Paper | ScholarLens